United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 10-1820
KEVEN A. MCKENNA,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
SANDRA POWELL, in her representative capacity;
GEORGE HEALY, in his representative capacity,
Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Mary M. Lisi, U.S. District Judge]
Before
Torruella, Stahl and Howard,
Circuit Judges.
Keven A. McKenna pro se, with whom Keven A. McKenna, P.C. was
on brief.
Michael W. Field, Special Assistant Attorney General, for
appellees.
January 27, 2011
PER CURIAM. Plaintiff Keven McKenna appeals from an
order dismissing his federal court action under the so-called
Younger doctrine. See Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971)
(requiring district courts to stay or dismiss a federal action in
favor of continued prosecution of related state litigation).
Defendants Sandra Powell, director of the Rhode Island Department
of Labor and Training, and George Healy, chief judge of the Rhode
Island Workers Compensation Court, contend that dismissal was
required in light of ongoing state judicial proceedings.
Having read the briefs and record with care, we think
this case is a paradigm for Younger abstention. We see no reason
to expand upon the magistrate judge's thoughtful report and
recommendation, McKenna v. Powell, No. 10-017, 2010 WL 2474037
(D.R.I. Apr. 28, 2010), subsequently adopted by the district court,
McKenna v. Powell, No. 10-017, 2010 WL 2346619 (D.R.I. June 9,
2010). See, e.g., Mir-Yepez v. Banco Popular de P.R., 560 F.3d 14,
15 (1st Cir. 2009) ("We consistently have espoused the view that
when a lower court accurately takes the measure of a case, applies
the correct legal rules, and articulates a convincing rationale,
'an appellate court should refrain from writing at length to no
other end than to hear its own words resonate.'" (quoting Lawton v.
State Mut. Life Assur. Co. of Am., 101 F.3d 218, 220 (1st Cir.
1996))). Accordingly, we summarily affirm the judgment below. See
1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.0(c).
Affirmed.
-2-